confluence_update_page

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does reveal a meaningful constraint: Confluence rejects updates that omit the current version number. However, it omits side effects, permission needs, and the fact that title and body are both required despite the 'and/or' phrasing.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two tight clauses with no filler: the action is front-loaded and the critical version caveat follows immediately. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No annotations or output schema mean the description must provide operational context. It gives the versioning caveat but leaves the 'and/or' ambiguity unresolved regarding required fields, and it does not clarify that unchanged fields must still be passed. Adequate, but a meaningful gap remains.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description does not need to restate parameter meanings. It adds the current-version requirement, but the schema already documents fetching with confluence_get_page and incrementing by 1, so the added value is minimal.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly identifies the operation (update), the resource (existing Confluence page), and the scope (title/content), which distinguishes it from create_page and get_page. The 'and/or' phrasing is slightly imprecise, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The word 'existing' and the version-number requirement imply this is for editing pages that have already been created and that the current version must be fetched first. It does not explicitly name alternatives like confluence_create_page, but the usage context is clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.